All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the lower court convicted Defendant A of the fraud related to the purchase price of Trade Union and North Korea against Defendant F Co., Ltd. among the instant facts charged against Defendant A

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of fraud

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against Defendant A, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable is not

2. According to the records on Defendant W’s grounds of appeal, Defendant W appealed against the judgment of the first instance and asserted only unfair sentencing as the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the lower court erred by mistake of facts or by misapprehending the legal principles cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on Defendant W, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not legitimate grounds for appeal

3. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor in light of the record, the lower court did not prove the fraud of Defendant A with respect to the Victim AV among the facts charged in the instant case against Defendant A for the reasons indicated in its reasoning.